W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > May 2012

Re: Naming Schema properties (Was: On using qualified names for properties)

From: Adrian Giurca <giurca@tu-cottbus.de>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 11:20:46 +0200
Message-ID: <4FB0CE6E.7010007@tu-cottbus.de>
To: Егор Антонов <elderos@yandex-team.ru>
CC: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, Guha <guha@google.com>, "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Hi Egor and Dan,

Thank you both for insights but I would say this issue remains crucial 
when I consider RDF extraction  and data interlinking.

All the best,
Adrian

On 5/14/2012 11:11 AM, Егор Антонов wrote:
> Sure, there is no problem
> We cannot change W3C specs anyway :-)
>
> 14.05.2012, 13:03, "Dan Brickley"<danbri@danbri.org>:
>> On 14 May 2012 10:50, Егор Антонов<elderos@yandex-team.ru>  wrote:
>>
>>>   I don't see any sense to include full class hierarchy in path.
>>>   It proposed something like this:
>>>
>>>   <div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Sculpture/">
>>>   <span itemprop="awards">  some award</span>
>>>   ...
>>>   </div>
>>>
>>>   the short form is transformed into type + property name [...]
>> This is one of those topics where there is no obvious right answer,
>> only tradeoffs.
>>
>> Can we agree to disagree here, and accept that for the purpose of
>> interchange and standards schema.org uses 'http://schema.org/' +
>> propertyname, following the conventions of RDFa Lite and other W3C
>> specs? Internally in various systems we are free to record all kinds
>> of extra information, including one or more type(s) associated with
>> the property occurrence.
>>
>> cheers,
>>
>> Dan
Received on Monday, 14 May 2012 09:21:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 22 May 2012 06:49:04 GMT